Asklemmy

49188 readers

424 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

279

ELI5 why is anarchy not "the guy with the bigger stick" making the rules? (lemmy.giftedmc.com)

submitted 1 year ago by haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

174 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm politically agnostic and have moved from a slightly conservative stance to a vastly more progressive stance (european). i still dont get the more niche things like tankies and anarchists at this point but I would like to, without spending 10 hours reading endless manifests (which do have merit, no doubt, but still).

Can someone explain to me why anarchy isnt the guy (or gal, or gang, or entity) with the bigger stick making the rules?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] inlandempire@jlai.lu 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Answering the following question might help in clearing up misconceptions: what is anarchism to you ?

From there we can discuss whether or not your definition is correct, and address your question.

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I was reading through this: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca2 but I'm overwhelmed with the amount of content and just wanted to understand if other people have an "easier to grasp the basics" stance I could ask of them.

I would so much love a "lateral society" where you are not better or worse than the person next to you (open source was recently cited as anarcho communism example) but are encouraged to contribute what you can to public benefit.

But watching examples of decapitated states devolving in to warlord rule makes me think the idea does not really work.

Example: we have this problem with 3E in open source, where some people just aren't educated enough on history and vile human behavior to put countermeasures in place and succumb to warlordism again (big company taking control in this case).

[–] inlandempire@jlai.lu 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah that's a long read and the webpage as it is designed itself isn't inviting, @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml posted a great comment which might be an easier introduction. I'll just select and copy paste paragraphs from your link that are relevant to understanding anarchism, but I do recommend allocating the time to read the whole thing if you're interested in learning more :

anarchists consider it essential to create a society based on three principles: liberty, equality and solidarity.

Liberty is essential for the full flowering of human intelligence, creativity, and dignity. To be dominated by another is to be denied the chance to think and act for oneself [...] Thus the society that maximises the growth of individuality will necessarily be based on voluntary association, not coercion and authority.

Equality is essential for genuine liberty to exist. There can be no real freedom in a class-stratified, hierarchical society riddled with gross inequalities of power, wealth, and privilege. For in such a society only a few -- those at the top of the hierarchy -- are relatively free, while the rest are semi-slaves. Hence without equality, liberty becomes a mockery -- at best the "freedom" to choose one's master (boss), as under capitalism.

Solidarity means mutual aid: working voluntarily and co-operatively with others who share the same goals and interests. [...] without liberty and equality, society becomes a pyramid of competing classes based on the domination of the lower by the higher strata. In such a society, as we know from our own, it's "dominate or be dominated," "dog eat dog," and "everyone for themselves."

Anarchists do not believe that everyone should be able to "do whatever they like," because some actions invariably involve the denial of the liberty of others.

Anarchists desire a decentralised society, based on free association. [...] Only by a rational decentralisation of power, both structurally and territorially, can individual liberty be fostered and encouraged. [...] anarchists favour organisations which minimise authority, keeping power at the base, in the hands of those who are affected by any decisions reached.

Addiitonally, this is a recommended read : Ruth Kinna - Anarchism: A Beginner's Guide - https://files.libcom.org/files/Anarchism%20-%20A%20Beginners%20Guide%20-%20Kinna,%20Ruth.pdf

Some youtube recommendations : Zoe Baker (@anarchozoe) ; Anark (@Anark) ; Red Planet (@RedPlanetShow) ; AudibleAnarchist (@AudibleAnarchist1)

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 3 points 1 year ago

Thank you so much for this elaborate reply. I will check your sources out.

[–] kriz@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Counter measures against warlordism would be crucial for effective anarchism for sure!

I think the easiest approach to anarchism is searching for Chomsky talking about it.

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 1 points 1 year ago

Will check it out, thanks!